I care so much because this is the general direction of nowadays shows/movies, let it be female ghostbusters , a black james bond etc. I see in many productions that the very identity is ripped off a movie just because what? I don't want ST to be in line with that (following todays shows in general). ST was always something special to me, it was different. It was better.
I totally get what you mean, I also hate the modern trend of tokenism, aka a character being only made for identity purposes and their whole personality revolves around superficial things like skin colour, gender, or sexuality. I totally get that, I hate it too because it is quantity over quality.
But it doesn't really apply here given your examples of the female Ghostbusters or a black James Bond. Because those two franchises are established in terms of who is who and what is what.
The Ghostbusters were originally a male team mostly, so to take a pre-established aspect of that team and change it to fit a diversity quota, yes is substanceless.
And James Bond is pre-established as a white male as written by Ian Fleming, so to change James Bond's race or gender would be altering the character beyond who he has been established to be.
But Star Trek has no pre-establishment with its characters in general. ST has always had diversity and not just tokenism, these characters of other races and genders and sexualities often are way more than those aspects of themselves. So the addition of these new characters isn't really an issue at all because it's one of the few things about this show which is actually pretty Trek-like.
Of course it is very true what you said. Why care about that gender terrorists? I guess the same reason is, why care about other terrorists?
I do want to say please don't call these people "terrorists". As much as I really don't like these kind of people either, please just don't. It is using the word way too liberally and ends up devaluing its actual meaning.
Just like if you call someone a "racist" for simply not liking a certain rapper's music or some other mundane thing. If people continue to use serious terms in completely uncharacteristic ways regarding its actual meaning, then the word comes to be what I call a "boy who cried wolf" word - a word which has serious accusatory power but has been used inappropriately so often that when real instances of the issue do arise, no one believes it when it is called out.
IF people don't stand up against them and their ambitions of changing our lifes, we already lost. I see so many bad things they already accomplished, like safe spaces, where it is more important on colleges to teach political correctness, rather than the truth. This all leads us to a dark place.
I agree this trend is a worrisome thing, but when it comes to media and marketing, the best way to act is to let the product show its merit or lack thereof.
For example when groups criticized the female Ghostbusters as a concept, all of those group's legitimate criticisms were lost in a sea of misogyny accusations instead of taken seriously. That has always been the tactic of these gender-focused people - lob false accusations which drown out the actual topic. So you have to know how to play their game, and how to play is ultimately not to play at all.
So instead, people began leaving the film to its "proof in the pudding", meaning letting the general public engage in the product and then letting the public's feelings define the product instead of the individual or small groups. Individuals and small groups are easy targets to silence, the public however is not.
And when the public was left to form the opinion on the female Ghostbusters, overwhelmingly the public disliked the film. The film's ratings show that it wasn't a funny or engaging movie for most people and that's why it tanked rather badly at the box office.
So my advice is - let the public speak for/against Discovery, the consensus will be known soon enough in whether STD gets renewed for a second season or not. But I don't think it will last more than two seasons judging from the current ratings. The show right now is holding at 7.3/10 approval rating which is the lowest ST series to date.
In order of ranking on IMDB, the shows rank in this order...
1. TNG - 8.6
2. TOS - 8.4
3. DS9 - 7.9
4. VOY - 7.7
5. ENT - 7.5
6. STD - 7.3
Looking at the reviews on IMDB: out of 706 people only 270 rated it higher than 7.3 which is a 38.2% approval rating from that site's users. 38.2% is not a good approval rating. With a slope like that, the show seems to be on a downward trend. If the show continues its format so far, then the downward trend will also continue - meaning cancellation at the end of the season or the second season. So just let the show plot its own course, because as it stands right now, the show will not stick around for long.
What we as fans need to focus on, is the fallout. Because when the newness of STD wears off, it is going to plummet pretty hard from its bad writing, bad acting, disrespect for franchise continuity, and CBS' inane decision to make the show difficult to access.
And when STD fails, everyone is going to look to the long-time fans to help explain why it failed because if anyone would know, it is the dedicated fans of the franchise. So we need to be there to say why it failed and to explain what would make a new ST series work properly.
In making our main focus the preparation for STD's inevitable failure, we can help prevent a total fallout of the franchise altogether. Because writers and producers are going to be discouraged from the failure, so we have to allay that discouragement and ensure that producing more ST series can indeed be massively successful if produced correctly. That's what is most important right now for us.
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
I care so much because this is the general direction of nowadays shows/movies, let it be female ghostbusters , a black james bond etc. I see in many productions that the very identity is ripped off a movie just because what? I don't want ST to be in line with that (following todays shows in general). ST was always something special to me, it was different. It was better.
I totally get what you mean, I also hate the modern trend of tokenism, aka a character being only made for identity purposes and their whole personality revolves around superficial things like skin colour, gender, or sexuality. I totally get that, I hate it too because it is quantity over quality.
But it doesn't really apply here given your examples of the female Ghostbusters or a black James Bond. Because those two franchises are established in terms of who is who and what is what.
The Ghostbusters were originally a male team mostly, so to take a pre-established aspect of that team and change it to fit a diversity quota, yes is substanceless.
And James Bond is pre-established as a white male as written by Ian Fleming, so to change James Bond's race or gender would be altering the character beyond who he has been established to be.
But Star Trek has no pre-establishment with its characters in general. ST has always had diversity and not just tokenism, these characters of other races and genders and sexualities often are way more than those aspects of themselves. So the addition of these new characters isn't really an issue at all because it's one of the few things about this show which is actually pretty Trek-like.
(...)
Very well written. I mostly agree to all of it, only minor things where I slightly see or weight things differently.
But Star Trek has no pre-establishment with its characters in general.
You described a general pattern, where something from the prior or set movies was changed, like James Bond character was written as he was by Ian Flemming. Another general pattern was the compilation of the crew of the spaceship which also has changed. Grated, it was not established by a single author or show, but more of a tradition which we saw for over 50 years now. The crew always consisted of a crew which truly represented the human race of its primary audience. White males, females. If I have a look at my office, the composition is more like TNG or even DS9/VOY. It is not like DIS. If I have a look at the ISS crew, it is not like the DIS crew. As ST has always been about visions of a desirable future, I want to be part of that future if I look the show, I'm not. Don't exclude me. I'll never be able to identify me with a alien or female. So just make a fair distribution and not only the minorities would be glad, furthermore everyone would be glad in that regard. Cannot see a problem with that request.
I do want to say please don't call these people "terrorists". As much as I really don't like these kind of people either, please just don't.
Devaluing words are a problem, so as like "racist" etc are devalued I guess you are right about this. Even if the "killallwhitemen" people are hardly called not terrorists. But I think it is wise to not overtake their methods.
So my advice is - let the public speak for/against Discovery, the consensus will be known soon enough in whether STD gets renewed for a second season or not.
Agreed. That is exactly what we do right now. Not only we both are part of the public. We also help eachother (let alone other readers) to evolve a better opinion. Some things one first might think of were crap, after having a discussion, could turn out to actually be not that bad or even good.
Beside that, I don't want nor desire that the show gets cancelled early. I'd surely prefer if they change it to go into a better direction, because it has many good things. But it isn't ST, and there I see the main problem. So I guess, we as fans have to scream as loud and as often we can to have a chance that we will be heard. I know the chance is not that big, but it is a chance. Now in this very moment, by talking about it, we add to that chance.
This is the best example and reason why having a (depper) discussion is so awesome. Who thought that we would generally agree in the end. I surely haven't thought so, after making my first post here and reading some replies. But after reading many posts here I think I have learned a few new things. I don't want to say that I truly changed my stance regarding the fairness of the crew distribution. But it made me learn some new things on one side, on the other side it has hardened some of my original thoughts, because I have seen, there were no arguments I follow or share against them.
(Had to chop the quote because the post was to long for submitting)
After seeing Episode 4, I have to say: The Show gets better and better.
And I think that Burnham represents the ST Ideals very good.
They really where able to make Ripper the Monster I fear, to become Ripper the big Teddybear that I pitty - Love it!
Live long and prosper.
Not a Native English speaker - be lenient toward me
Beside that, I don't want nor desire that the show gets cancelled early. I'd surely prefer if they change it to go into a better direction, because it has many good things. But it isn't ST, and there I see the main problem.
So far I am ambivalent if the show gets cancelled early or not. But as we agree, so far it is not Star Trek. I could overlook the technology difference, i.e. the fact that STD has way more advanced tech than TOS despite supposedly occurring a decade before it. But it'd take a lot more work to turn the good things about STD into being a worthwhile series of the franchise.
But I think I just figured out the big tour-de-force that the writers could do to make Discovery more properly part of the Trek franchise. The solution is so much simpler than I imagined.
Reveal that Lorca et al are actually Section 31 instead of regular Starfleet!!!
Think about it, this could easily explain everything! And doing so would not compromise the Starfleet principles which have been established by the franchise. Discovery and its crew being secretly Section 31 would explain why they value brashness, force, violence, and using unethical means to get things done for the Federation. Section 31 is all about shady backdeals, undercover intelligence, and doing the Federation's/Starfleet's dirty work in secret.
As I think about it, this is the only saving grace the writers could insert into the show to make me somewhat appreciate the series. It is the only way to appropriately tie in the series with the rest of the Trek universe.
If it is the case that Discovery is about Section 31, then it won't be the most perfect tie-in, but it would fit into the franchise lore rather seamlessly. And the series would stop feeling like it's disrespecting and ignoring Trek lore.
I am going to hope with all my might that this turns out to be the reality of Discovery. And if so, then if the show doesn't want to lose more viewers, this revelation needs to happen soon, otherwise people already frustrated with the show aren't going to stick around long enough to learn the truth.
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
They will do exactly that GG, BUT, that opens the show to a whole host of other problems. If this is S31, then am I to believe this crew is, for the most part, made of military trained individuals? Then, WOW!? Failed training sims. Crew looking as though they've never done a push-up, nor have any combat training. A 1st Officer who is cowardly. My gawds, don't hope for an S31 show that can't even military (bro.)
I care so much because this is the general direction of nowadays shows/movies, let it be female ghostbusters , a black james bond etc. I see in many productions that the very identity is ripped off a movie just because what? I don't want ST to be in line with that (following todays shows in general). ST was always something special to me, it was different. It was better.
I totally get what you mean, I also hate the modern trend of tokenism, aka a character being only made for identity purposes and their whole personality revolves around superficial things like skin colour, gender, or sexuality. I totally get that, I hate it too because it is quantity over quality.
But it doesn't really apply here given your examples of the female Ghostbusters or a black James Bond. Because those two franchises are established in terms of who is who and what is what.
The Ghostbusters were originally a male team mostly, so to take a pre-established aspect of that team and change it to fit a diversity quota, yes is substanceless.
And James Bond is pre-established as a white male as written by Ian Fleming, so to change James Bond's race or gender would be altering the character beyond who he has been established to be.
But Star Trek has no pre-establishment with its characters in general. ST has always had diversity and not just tokenism, these characters of other races and genders and sexualities often are way more than those aspects of themselves. So the addition of these new characters isn't really an issue at all because it's one of the few things about this show which is actually pretty Trek-like.
Of course it is very true what you said. Why care about that gender terrorists? I guess the same reason is, why care about other terrorists?
I do want to say please don't call these people "terrorists". As much as I really don't like these kind of people either, please just don't. It is using the word way too liberally and ends up devaluing its actual meaning.
Just like if you call someone a "racist" for simply not liking a certain rapper's music or some other mundane thing. If people continue to use serious terms in completely uncharacteristic ways regarding its actual meaning, then the word comes to be what I call a "boy who cried wolf" word - a word which has serious accusatory power but has been used inappropriately so often that when real instances of the issue do arise, no one believes it when it is called out.
IF people don't stand up against them and their ambitions of changing our lifes, we already lost. I see so many bad things they already accomplished, like safe spaces, where it is more important on colleges to teach political correctness, rather than the truth. This all leads us to a dark place.
I agree this trend is a worrisome thing, but when it comes to media and marketing, the best way to act is to let the product show its merit or lack thereof.
For example when groups criticized the female Ghostbusters as a concept, all of those group's legitimate criticisms were lost in a sea of misogyny accusations instead of taken seriously. That has always been the tactic of these gender-focused people - lob false accusations which drown out the actual topic. So you have to know how to play their game, and how to play is ultimately not to play at all.
So instead, people began leaving the film to its "proof in the pudding", meaning letting the general public engage in the product and then letting the public's feelings define the product instead of the individual or small groups. Individuals and small groups are easy targets to silence, the public however is not.
And when the public was left to form the opinion on the female Ghostbusters, overwhelmingly the public disliked the film. The film's ratings show that it wasn't a funny or engaging movie for most people and that's why it tanked rather badly at the box office.
So my advice is - let the public speak for/against Discovery, the consensus will be known soon enough in whether STD gets renewed for a second season or not. But I don't think it will last more than two seasons judging from the current ratings. The show right now is holding at 7.3/10 approval rating which is the lowest ST series to date.
In order of ranking on IMDB, the shows rank in this order...
1. TNG - 8.6
2. TOS - 8.4
3. DS9 - 7.9
4. VOY - 7.7
5. ENT - 7.5
6. STD - 7.3
Looking at the reviews on IMDB: out of 706 people only 270 rated it higher than 7.3 which is a 38.2% approval rating from that site's users. 38.2% is not a good approval rating. With a slope like that, the show seems to be on a downward trend. If the show continues its format so far, then the downward trend will also continue - meaning cancellation at the end of the season or the second season. So just let the show plot its own course, because as it stands right now, the show will not stick around for long.
What we as fans need to focus on, is the fallout. Because when the newness of STD wears off, it is going to plummet pretty hard from its bad writing, bad acting, disrespect for franchise continuity, and CBS' inane decision to make the show difficult to access.
And when STD fails, everyone is going to look to the long-time fans to help explain why it failed because if anyone would know, it is the dedicated fans of the franchise. So we need to be there to say why it failed and to explain what would make a new ST series work properly.
In making our main focus the preparation for STD's inevitable failure, we can help prevent a total fallout of the franchise altogether. Because writers and producers are going to be discouraged from the failure, so we have to allay that discouragement and ensure that producing more ST series can indeed be massively successful if produced correctly. That's what is most important right now for us.
Your numbers are more pertinent in a place where media is in the old traditional model. With smaller and smaller audiences needed for a 'hit' I'm not sure the comparison of numbers equates to apples and apples. Orange Is the New Black for instance is considered a continuing hit with less than the Discovery debut in its current season premier, and is in the same subscription model.
I'm spit balling, but I speculate that the numbers that will matter are the CBS All Access membership numbers in the US. How many go past the trial and continue to pay, etc. as there is not much else you get with that streaming service that you can't get OTA. The Good Fight, though it looks intriguing (especially if you are a fan of the Good Wife), does not look to me to have the fan base nor the oomph to make that much of a difference. (Again speculation.)
(As I say this, my partner is talking about wanting to watch the Good Fight, go figure...)
The section 31 deal, also, that fixes Starfleet. It does not fix the Klingons. I don't see how Kor, or Koloth can come from anything we've seen so far. Klingons eat the hearts of their conquered foes in a ritualistic fashion--- they don't put them on the dinner table. It ain't just the ugly that's the problem.
(...)
The section 31 deal, also, that fixes Starfleet. It does not fix the Klingons. I don't see how Kor, or Koloth can come from anything we've seen so far. Klingons eat the hearts of their conquered foes in a ritualistic fashion--- they don't put them on the dinner table. It ain't just the ugly that's the problem.
Right. The S31 deal is by no means optimal. But what the DIS makers now have to do is damage limitations, to somehow steer the show into the right direction and fix those obvious flaws. This is of course not optimal and hard, but it is the best they can do - handle the current situation.
Regarding the Klingons, of course, if they tell us (and thus fix it for me) that the Klingons had another genetic experiment, like we have seen in ENT (season 4) it is of course very unrealistic and annoying. But at least we can try to oversee it and dispose it as the usual first season problems. This will be no easy way for the producers... but if they don't go it, DIS won't last long, like many many people forecast.
What I personally find very funny is, before DIS aired, there were so much people (in the old forum) who praised ST and ranted against the people who all forecasted this (based on the things we have seen and heard). We haven't seen any of them raising their voice again. I think retrospective a little sorry would be nice to hear from them.
The best thing at this point for the show is to, as you guys have stated, reveal that Discovery is in fact part of Section 31, which is what a lot of people have been speculating after the last couple of episodes. The ship's identification number is NCC-1031, which would be stupid if it was just mere coincidence. The Klingons, however, seem nonredeemable at this point in time.
I watched the pilot episode wondering what in hell just happened. It did not bring me in at all. The only thing that has begun turning the gears in my head with this show is the uniform design; too fancy for the time it is supposed to represent, but it has me taking the use of gold trim and using it to accent an "updated" Voyager uniform (only one gold band instead of three, of course. Just enough to add a minute amount of flare without blinding everyone).
There are three ways to do something; the right way, the wrong way, and the Janeway.
They will do exactly that GG, BUT, that opens the show to a whole host of other problems. If this is S31, then am I to believe this crew is, for the most part, made of military trained individuals? Then, WOW!? Failed training sims. Crew looking as though they've never done a push-up, nor have any combat training. A 1st Officer who is cowardly. My gawds, don't hope for an S31 show that can't even military (bro.)
I am actually thinking it isn't the whole crew who would be S31. If anyone it'd be Lorca and Landry, but it may be no one, it may be that the Captain is being told to operate under S31's guidance and protocols. To me, it'd be better if Lorca was S31. To have him simply be under the guidance of them would be a little more plothole-y than if he was a S31 agent himself.
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
The section 31 deal, also, that fixes Starfleet. It does not fix the Klingons. I don't see how Kor, or Koloth can come from anything we've seen so far. Klingons eat the hearts of their conquered foes in a ritualistic fashion--- they don't put them on the dinner table. It ain't just the ugly that's the problem.
Well yes, I did say that the S31 revelation wasn't perfect as it would still not explain the Cringe-ons ("Klingons"). I honestly have no idea what a good explanation for them would be. It would probably involve some plot heavy in genetic experimentation again.
Like maybe after the genetic issues introduced in ENT, Klingon doctors and geneticists tried their hands at resequencing the Klingon genome to revert many of its citizens back to normal. But their efforts only resulted in STD's Klingons, still not the actual Klingon original appearance. While those smooth, ridgeless foreheaded Klingons who were left untreated were the ones who had their own DNA resurface over time and multiple generations.
I honestly don't know, but I hope they come up with a decent explanation for these Cringe-ons and how they fit into the franchise established Klingons we know and love.
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
It'll be, for me at this moment, impossible to reconcile Lorca being a Captain of a Fleet ship and also a double/covert/secret agent working under a different agenda. A "Cringe-on" (digga!) genetics story-line to make an excuse for there appearance is already more easily to accept for me atm...
It's simple STD is not Star Trek at all, but rather Starship Troopers wearing Star Trek clothes. Nothing about any of the show reminds me of anything related to Star Trek.
For those interested in exploring a different perspective, there was something in the last episode of DIS which reminded me of an episode of TOS. I wrote a something about that in another thread: A tale of the Tardigrade and the Horta.
We are all downstream from each other and ourselves, therefore choose to be relaxed and groovy. Consider participating in civil discourse, understanding the Tardigrade, and wandering with the Subspace Eddies.
It's simple STD is not Star Trek at all, but rather Starship Troopers wearing Star Trek clothes. Nothing about any of the show reminds me of anything related to Star Trek.
For those interested in exploring a different perspective, there was something in the last episode of DIS which reminded me of an episode of TOS. I wrote a something about that in another thread: A tale of the Tardigrade and the Horta.
Big difference ... Once they realized what the Horta was, they developed a symbiotic relationship with it. Here, they are knowingly using the space slug and don't care about it's pain or that it was attacking in self defense. They want to use it as a weapon and don't care about it any farther than that.
Big difference ... Once they realized what the Horta was, they developed a symbiotic relationship with it. Here, they are knowingly using the space slug and don't care about it's pain or that it was attacking in self defense. They want to use it as a weapon and don't care about it any farther than that.
The generalization of "they" is a mischaracterizaton and/or oversimplification. Michael Burnham's thoughts on Ripper are demonstratively different (she did care) than was Ellen Landry's and Gabriel Lorcas (they didn't). Paul Stamets thoughts on the matter aren't clearly communicated in the episode. Lorca decided that saving the people (and dilithium) on Corvan-2 took precedence not only to Ripper but the safety of the entire crew (using the spore drive against Stamets recommendations that it wasn't ready).
Just as in the TOS episode, there wasn't immediate consensus on the Horta, between the miners, Spock or the rest of the Enterprise crew. There also wasn't an additional dilemma (the battle at Corvan-2) creating a time pressure for making questionable choices.
Are there differences, yes. Is there a lack of anything similar to or resembling Star Trek, as has been claimed many time in this thread and elsewhere, no.
We are all downstream from each other and ourselves, therefore choose to be relaxed and groovy. Consider participating in civil discourse, understanding the Tardigrade, and wandering with the Subspace Eddies.
A single outlier doesn't change "they". Because no one who witnessed the Ripper while "navigating" couldn't notice the pain it was in. And the captain clearly knows and made clear he doesn't care. He wants it weoponized regardless. And there was no such order with the Horta by Kirk. He didn't force it to dig tunnels after spock discovered the truth about it (or before). Or scheme to dissect it to weaponize it's corrosive acid. So much for the prime directive. Regardless, the whole concept of the spore drive and the tortured space slug is ridiculous. Like Scientist wrote ... this could be Starship Troopers wearing Starfleet badges.
Big difference ... Once they realized what the Horta was, they developed a symbiotic relationship with it. Here, they are knowingly using the space slug and don't care about it's pain or that it was attacking in self defense. They want to use it as a weapon and don't care about it any farther than that.
The generalization of "they" is a mischaracterizaton and/or oversimplification. Michael Burnham's thoughts on Ripper are demonstratively different (she did care) than was Ellen Landry's and Gabriel Lorcas (they didn't). Paul Stamets thoughts on the matter aren't clearly communicated in the episode. Lorca decided that saving the people (and dilithium) on Corvan-2 took precedence not only to Ripper but the safety of the entire crew (using the spore drive against Stamets recommendations that it wasn't ready).
Just as in the TOS episode, there wasn't immediate consensus on the Horta, between the miners, Spock or the rest of the Enterprise crew. There also wasn't an additional dilemma (the battle at Corvan-2) creating a time pressure for making questionable choices.
Are there differences, yes. Is there a lack of anything similar to or resembling Star Trek, as has been claimed many time in this thread and elsewhere, no.
You talk about differences of actions advocated by miners vs Starfleet folks as if that is completely equivocal. I find that just as simplistic and very disheartening. Starfleet vs Starfleet ESPECIALLY someone in authority in SF advocating the weaponization of a species, not a civilian business is closer as has been described the movie version of Starship Troopers (Ironically which was a ridiculous travesty being only remotely related to its source material by some similarities of the aliens they were at war with.)
You're on as shaky ground as the con folks.
That's the thing, Roddenberry, Behr, Pillar, Taylor, showed us who we could be. This is just showing a mirror to the ugly that we are with the occasional bright spot. Star Trek TOS/TNG, etc was based on the concept that we would grow and evolve, despite what Q said at Farpoint. Picard speaking to the unfrozen lawyer, mother and country singer being an explanation, as is one of Picards discussions with Lily Slone (not the he loses his marbles one, but one of their earlier discussions) in First Contact.
Kirk: “Death. Destruction. Disease. Horror. That’s what war is all about. That’s what makes it a thing to be avoided.”,
“You know the greatest danger facing us is ourselves, an irrational fear of the unknown. But there’s no such thing as the unknown — only things temporarily hidden, temporarily not understood.”
The closest we might come is Equinox, which was held up as a cautionary tale -- and if Lorca finds anything other than a bad end quickly, then the morality tale which a vast majority of Trek was based on is broken and we are bound to just holding up and glorifying the baser lowest qualities of humanity At that point, the 'end justifies the means' is the message of Trek as well as do what ever it takes to win a war.
And on that note, as the 'realism' argument comes about, we can learn from our own wars, like the US involvement in Vietnam. One issue towards the end of the US involvement was a management move on body count which led some units and soldiers to do some really bad things to up their 'enemy' body count and be rewarded, while the majority of the military acted appropriately with civilians and were not evaluated as strongly. Those rewarded units caused morale issues with the Vietnamese which led to more Viet Cong being recruited which may have led to greater US casualties and strengthened the N Vietnamese position in attempting to negotiate the US departure ensuring or at least hastening the collapse of S Vietnam.
Could there be any other outcome than a swift cancellation of this abomination? So, now SF crew share quarters, swear using 150yr old cuss words (that apparently even a Vulcan raised human knows?!?!,) exploit sentient creatures, doesn't forbid the fraternization of crew on Starships, promotes cowards as 1st officers (that ofc has them sharing Captains duties when need be,) and has Klingons that take human prisoners and flies them around on prison ships?!?!?!? My head is spinning. My conviction to watch this train-wreck only strengthens so that I may laugh when the news of cancellation/monies lost/super low viewership inevitably comes our way.
Worf killed Duras in personal combat before going to DS9.
He also won champion standing in the Bat'leth tournament in at least one of the timelines he shifted between. There was probably a few other victories.
I was exaggerating of course - suffice to say he got beat up a lot in TNG.
Worf killed Duras in personal combat before going to DS9.
He also won champion standing in the Bat'leth tournament in at least one of the timelines he shifted between. There was probably a few other victories.
I was exaggerating of course - suffice to say he got beat up a lot in TNG.
Well he was called out as being soft by people like his brother and others for being raised by humans, lol.
Reminds me I need to hang up my Paul Sorvino autograph... I keep forgetting about his adopted brother...
I will say that this past episode of Discovery (Episode 5) has been the best of the season to me and felt the most Trek. There was some well-anticipated character growth, even if some of it was odd, e.g. the ending as it was unexpected. But despite this being the best episode of this series so far, in my opinion that is not a high bar to accomplish given the lacklustre previous 4 episodes. However, it is a spot of light in a series with a dismal start.
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
I will say that this past episode of Discovery (Episode 5) has been the best of the season to me and felt the most Trek. There was some well-anticipated character growth, even if some of it was odd, e.g. the ending as it was unexpected. But despite this being the best episode of this series so far, in my opinion that is not a high bar to accomplish given the lacklustre previous 4 episodes. However, it is a spot of light in a series with a dismal start.
Well maybe it's taken time to get rid of the influence of Into Hotmess's, Alex Kurtzman.
Or its a fluke.
I'll wait to hear reports from you before watching any further. Got a few other series to distract me for now.
I will say that this past episode of Discovery (Episode 5) has been the best of the season to me and felt the most Trek. There was some well-anticipated character growth, even if some of it was odd, e.g. the ending as it was unexpected. But despite this being the best episode of this series so far, in my opinion that is not a high bar to accomplish given the lacklustre previous 4 episodes. However, it is a spot of light in a series with a dismal start.
Well maybe it's taken time to get rid of the influence of Into Hotmess's, Alex Kurtzman.
Or its a fluke.
I'll wait to hear reports from you before watching any further. Got a few other series to distract me for now.
Then I'll start a mini-project on this thread, or will start a new thread of Gaghgagh's weekly episode critiques/reviews
Admiral of the Haus of GaghGagh, Starbase level 94, we are not accepting members at this time.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
Comments
I totally get what you mean, I also hate the modern trend of tokenism, aka a character being only made for identity purposes and their whole personality revolves around superficial things like skin colour, gender, or sexuality. I totally get that, I hate it too because it is quantity over quality.
But it doesn't really apply here given your examples of the female Ghostbusters or a black James Bond. Because those two franchises are established in terms of who is who and what is what.
The Ghostbusters were originally a male team mostly, so to take a pre-established aspect of that team and change it to fit a diversity quota, yes is substanceless.
And James Bond is pre-established as a white male as written by Ian Fleming, so to change James Bond's race or gender would be altering the character beyond who he has been established to be.
But Star Trek has no pre-establishment with its characters in general. ST has always had diversity and not just tokenism, these characters of other races and genders and sexualities often are way more than those aspects of themselves. So the addition of these new characters isn't really an issue at all because it's one of the few things about this show which is actually pretty Trek-like.
I do want to say please don't call these people "terrorists". As much as I really don't like these kind of people either, please just don't. It is using the word way too liberally and ends up devaluing its actual meaning.
Just like if you call someone a "racist" for simply not liking a certain rapper's music or some other mundane thing. If people continue to use serious terms in completely uncharacteristic ways regarding its actual meaning, then the word comes to be what I call a "boy who cried wolf" word - a word which has serious accusatory power but has been used inappropriately so often that when real instances of the issue do arise, no one believes it when it is called out.
I agree this trend is a worrisome thing, but when it comes to media and marketing, the best way to act is to let the product show its merit or lack thereof.
For example when groups criticized the female Ghostbusters as a concept, all of those group's legitimate criticisms were lost in a sea of misogyny accusations instead of taken seriously. That has always been the tactic of these gender-focused people - lob false accusations which drown out the actual topic. So you have to know how to play their game, and how to play is ultimately not to play at all.
So instead, people began leaving the film to its "proof in the pudding", meaning letting the general public engage in the product and then letting the public's feelings define the product instead of the individual or small groups. Individuals and small groups are easy targets to silence, the public however is not.
And when the public was left to form the opinion on the female Ghostbusters, overwhelmingly the public disliked the film. The film's ratings show that it wasn't a funny or engaging movie for most people and that's why it tanked rather badly at the box office.
So my advice is - let the public speak for/against Discovery, the consensus will be known soon enough in whether STD gets renewed for a second season or not. But I don't think it will last more than two seasons judging from the current ratings. The show right now is holding at 7.3/10 approval rating which is the lowest ST series to date.
In order of ranking on IMDB, the shows rank in this order...
1. TNG - 8.6
2. TOS - 8.4
3. DS9 - 7.9
4. VOY - 7.7
5. ENT - 7.5
6. STD - 7.3
Looking at the reviews on IMDB: out of 706 people only 270 rated it higher than 7.3 which is a 38.2% approval rating from that site's users. 38.2% is not a good approval rating. With a slope like that, the show seems to be on a downward trend. If the show continues its format so far, then the downward trend will also continue - meaning cancellation at the end of the season or the second season. So just let the show plot its own course, because as it stands right now, the show will not stick around for long.
What we as fans need to focus on, is the fallout. Because when the newness of STD wears off, it is going to plummet pretty hard from its bad writing, bad acting, disrespect for franchise continuity, and CBS' inane decision to make the show difficult to access.
And when STD fails, everyone is going to look to the long-time fans to help explain why it failed because if anyone would know, it is the dedicated fans of the franchise. So we need to be there to say why it failed and to explain what would make a new ST series work properly.
In making our main focus the preparation for STD's inevitable failure, we can help prevent a total fallout of the franchise altogether. Because writers and producers are going to be discouraged from the failure, so we have to allay that discouragement and ensure that producing more ST series can indeed be massively successful if produced correctly. That's what is most important right now for us.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
Very well written. I mostly agree to all of it, only minor things where I slightly see or weight things differently.
You described a general pattern, where something from the prior or set movies was changed, like James Bond character was written as he was by Ian Flemming. Another general pattern was the compilation of the crew of the spaceship which also has changed. Grated, it was not established by a single author or show, but more of a tradition which we saw for over 50 years now. The crew always consisted of a crew which truly represented the human race of its primary audience. White males, females. If I have a look at my office, the composition is more like TNG or even DS9/VOY. It is not like DIS. If I have a look at the ISS crew, it is not like the DIS crew. As ST has always been about visions of a desirable future, I want to be part of that future if I look the show, I'm not. Don't exclude me. I'll never be able to identify me with a alien or female. So just make a fair distribution and not only the minorities would be glad, furthermore everyone would be glad in that regard. Cannot see a problem with that request.
Devaluing words are a problem, so as like "racist" etc are devalued I guess you are right about this. Even if the "killallwhitemen" people are hardly called not terrorists. But I think it is wise to not overtake their methods.
Agreed. That is exactly what we do right now. Not only we both are part of the public. We also help eachother (let alone other readers) to evolve a better opinion. Some things one first might think of were crap, after having a discussion, could turn out to actually be not that bad or even good.
Beside that, I don't want nor desire that the show gets cancelled early. I'd surely prefer if they change it to go into a better direction, because it has many good things. But it isn't ST, and there I see the main problem. So I guess, we as fans have to scream as loud and as often we can to have a chance that we will be heard. I know the chance is not that big, but it is a chance. Now in this very moment, by talking about it, we add to that chance.
This is the best example and reason why having a (depper) discussion is so awesome. Who thought that we would generally agree in the end. I surely haven't thought so, after making my first post here and reading some replies. But after reading many posts here I think I have learned a few new things. I don't want to say that I truly changed my stance regarding the fairness of the crew distribution. But it made me learn some new things on one side, on the other side it has hardened some of my original thoughts, because I have seen, there were no arguments I follow or share against them.
(Had to chop the quote because the post was to long for submitting)
And I think that Burnham represents the ST Ideals very good.
They really where able to make Ripper the Monster I fear, to become Ripper the big Teddybear that I pitty - Love it!
Not a Native English speaker - be lenient toward me
So far I am ambivalent if the show gets cancelled early or not. But as we agree, so far it is not Star Trek. I could overlook the technology difference, i.e. the fact that STD has way more advanced tech than TOS despite supposedly occurring a decade before it. But it'd take a lot more work to turn the good things about STD into being a worthwhile series of the franchise.
But I think I just figured out the big tour-de-force that the writers could do to make Discovery more properly part of the Trek franchise. The solution is so much simpler than I imagined.
Reveal that Lorca et al are actually Section 31 instead of regular Starfleet!!!
Think about it, this could easily explain everything! And doing so would not compromise the Starfleet principles which have been established by the franchise. Discovery and its crew being secretly Section 31 would explain why they value brashness, force, violence, and using unethical means to get things done for the Federation. Section 31 is all about shady backdeals, undercover intelligence, and doing the Federation's/Starfleet's dirty work in secret.
As I think about it, this is the only saving grace the writers could insert into the show to make me somewhat appreciate the series. It is the only way to appropriately tie in the series with the rest of the Trek universe.
If it is the case that Discovery is about Section 31, then it won't be the most perfect tie-in, but it would fit into the franchise lore rather seamlessly. And the series would stop feeling like it's disrespecting and ignoring Trek lore.
I am going to hope with all my might that this turns out to be the reality of Discovery. And if so, then if the show doesn't want to lose more viewers, this revelation needs to happen soon, otherwise people already frustrated with the show aren't going to stick around long enough to learn the truth.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
Your numbers are more pertinent in a place where media is in the old traditional model. With smaller and smaller audiences needed for a 'hit' I'm not sure the comparison of numbers equates to apples and apples. Orange Is the New Black for instance is considered a continuing hit with less than the Discovery debut in its current season premier, and is in the same subscription model.
I'm spit balling, but I speculate that the numbers that will matter are the CBS All Access membership numbers in the US. How many go past the trial and continue to pay, etc. as there is not much else you get with that streaming service that you can't get OTA. The Good Fight, though it looks intriguing (especially if you are a fan of the Good Wife), does not look to me to have the fan base nor the oomph to make that much of a difference. (Again speculation.)
(As I say this, my partner is talking about wanting to watch the Good Fight, go figure...)
The section 31 deal, also, that fixes Starfleet. It does not fix the Klingons. I don't see how Kor, or Koloth can come from anything we've seen so far. Klingons eat the hearts of their conquered foes in a ritualistic fashion--- they don't put them on the dinner table. It ain't just the ugly that's the problem.
Right. The S31 deal is by no means optimal. But what the DIS makers now have to do is damage limitations, to somehow steer the show into the right direction and fix those obvious flaws. This is of course not optimal and hard, but it is the best they can do - handle the current situation.
Regarding the Klingons, of course, if they tell us (and thus fix it for me) that the Klingons had another genetic experiment, like we have seen in ENT (season 4) it is of course very unrealistic and annoying. But at least we can try to oversee it and dispose it as the usual first season problems. This will be no easy way for the producers... but if they don't go it, DIS won't last long, like many many people forecast.
I watched the pilot episode wondering what in hell just happened. It did not bring me in at all. The only thing that has begun turning the gears in my head with this show is the uniform design; too fancy for the time it is supposed to represent, but it has me taking the use of gold trim and using it to accent an "updated" Voyager uniform (only one gold band instead of three, of course. Just enough to add a minute amount of flare without blinding everyone).
DB: Do Better.
Member of Starship Trista.
I am actually thinking it isn't the whole crew who would be S31. If anyone it'd be Lorca and Landry, but it may be no one, it may be that the Captain is being told to operate under S31's guidance and protocols. To me, it'd be better if Lorca was S31. To have him simply be under the guidance of them would be a little more plothole-y than if he was a S31 agent himself.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
Well yes, I did say that the S31 revelation wasn't perfect as it would still not explain the Cringe-ons ("Klingons"). I honestly have no idea what a good explanation for them would be. It would probably involve some plot heavy in genetic experimentation again.
Like maybe after the genetic issues introduced in ENT, Klingon doctors and geneticists tried their hands at resequencing the Klingon genome to revert many of its citizens back to normal. But their efforts only resulted in STD's Klingons, still not the actual Klingon original appearance. While those smooth, ridgeless foreheaded Klingons who were left untreated were the ones who had their own DNA resurface over time and multiple generations.
I honestly don't know, but I hope they come up with a decent explanation for these Cringe-ons and how they fit into the franchise established Klingons we know and love.
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
The original will always be the best. No other show deserved to call itself Star Trek.
A tale of the Tardigrade and the Horta.
Consider participating in civil discourse, understanding the Tardigrade, and wandering with the Subspace Eddies.
Exactly!!!!
Big difference ... Once they realized what the Horta was, they developed a symbiotic relationship with it. Here, they are knowingly using the space slug and don't care about it's pain or that it was attacking in self defense. They want to use it as a weapon and don't care about it any farther than that.
The generalization of "they" is a mischaracterizaton and/or oversimplification. Michael Burnham's thoughts on Ripper are demonstratively different (she did care) than was Ellen Landry's and Gabriel Lorcas (they didn't). Paul Stamets thoughts on the matter aren't clearly communicated in the episode. Lorca decided that saving the people (and dilithium) on Corvan-2 took precedence not only to Ripper but the safety of the entire crew (using the spore drive against Stamets recommendations that it wasn't ready).
Just as in the TOS episode, there wasn't immediate consensus on the Horta, between the miners, Spock or the rest of the Enterprise crew. There also wasn't an additional dilemma (the battle at Corvan-2) creating a time pressure for making questionable choices.
Are there differences, yes. Is there a lack of anything similar to or resembling Star Trek, as has been claimed many time in this thread and elsewhere, no.
Consider participating in civil discourse, understanding the Tardigrade, and wandering with the Subspace Eddies.
You talk about differences of actions advocated by miners vs Starfleet folks as if that is completely equivocal. I find that just as simplistic and very disheartening. Starfleet vs Starfleet ESPECIALLY someone in authority in SF advocating the weaponization of a species, not a civilian business is closer as has been described the movie version of Starship Troopers (Ironically which was a ridiculous travesty being only remotely related to its source material by some similarities of the aliens they were at war with.)
You're on as shaky ground as the con folks.
That's the thing, Roddenberry, Behr, Pillar, Taylor, showed us who we could be. This is just showing a mirror to the ugly that we are with the occasional bright spot. Star Trek TOS/TNG, etc was based on the concept that we would grow and evolve, despite what Q said at Farpoint. Picard speaking to the unfrozen lawyer, mother and country singer being an explanation, as is one of Picards discussions with Lily Slone (not the he loses his marbles one, but one of their earlier discussions) in First Contact.
Kirk: “Death. Destruction. Disease. Horror. That’s what war is all about. That’s what makes it a thing to be avoided.”,
“You know the greatest danger facing us is ourselves, an irrational fear of the unknown. But there’s no such thing as the unknown — only things temporarily hidden, temporarily not understood.”
The closest we might come is Equinox, which was held up as a cautionary tale -- and if Lorca finds anything other than a bad end quickly, then the morality tale which a vast majority of Trek was based on is broken and we are bound to just holding up and glorifying the baser lowest qualities of humanity At that point, the 'end justifies the means' is the message of Trek as well as do what ever it takes to win a war.
And on that note, as the 'realism' argument comes about, we can learn from our own wars, like the US involvement in Vietnam. One issue towards the end of the US involvement was a management move on body count which led some units and soldiers to do some really bad things to up their 'enemy' body count and be rewarded, while the majority of the military acted appropriately with civilians and were not evaluated as strongly. Those rewarded units caused morale issues with the Vietnamese which led to more Viet Cong being recruited which may have led to greater US casualties and strengthened the N Vietnamese position in attempting to negotiate the US departure ensuring or at least hastening the collapse of S Vietnam.
Only watched the first episode so can't comment on this particular combat, but ... when was hand to hand combat vs Klingons ever a problem for humans?
Not in TOS.
Picard held his own in a 2 on 1 in TNG.
DS9 crew contained Gowron's boarding parties.
For that matter, I think it wasn't until he arrived on DS9 that Worf ever won a fight.
Worf killed Duras in personal combat before going to DS9.
He also won champion standing in the Bat'leth tournament in at least one of the timelines he shifted between. There was probably a few other victories.
I was exaggerating of course - suffice to say he got beat up a lot in TNG.
Well he was called out as being soft by people like his brother and others for being raised by humans, lol.
Reminds me I need to hang up my Paul Sorvino autograph... I keep forgetting about his adopted brother...
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.
Well maybe it's taken time to get rid of the influence of Into Hotmess's, Alex Kurtzman.
Or its a fluke.
I'll wait to hear reports from you before watching any further. Got a few other series to distract me for now.
Then I'll start a mini-project on this thread, or will start a new thread of Gaghgagh's weekly episode critiques/reviews
Captain of the voyage vessels: Queen of Bashir, Landsknecht, and Sunspear, the first luxury starship cruiseliners.
Amenities include wifi, fully-functioning holodecks, a full-service bar, 3 party decks, a Trill spa, and a business centre.
Fun fact: The ships are propelled by bouncy castle technology.